After 91 days of principal photography, the Martin Scorsese-directed biopic about Howard Hughes wrapped - just one day over schedule (And that was due to fire damage) according to Army Acherd's latest column in Variety.

Producer Graham King indicates things seemed to move smoothly - "We were on time and on budget -- just south of $110 million. When we got the script (by John Logan) we were ready to go. I couldn't believe it. And it's bigger than we ever imagined".

We can also see Hughes' famous plane in action - "In Montreal, the Coconut Grove nightclub was reproduced as was the interior of the Spruce Goose. Leo, as Hughes, is seen at the controls as it takes off for its brief flight.

The crash of Hughes' small plane in Beverly Hills was reproduced in Palos Verdes; the crash in a Ventura beet field, in Oxnard. An airport in San Bernardino was also put into play".

goddamn! 110 million, jeezus chreyest! there's no way this'll make its money back. what are the studios thinking giving him all that money? and where the hell is it going? theres no action or cgi? all for the sets, and so he can shoot it really pretty?

Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary: the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

i dunno. because its a biopic on howard hughes. not exactly blockbuster material and $110 million is a lot of money.

Agree here, MS films haven't so far been box office hits, his major still is Cape Fear, so I'm guessing here, if Aviator does really well it could make 80m in the US alone, if it doesn't it could be around 40-50m; now, we must add here to the 110m the marketing (around 50m?), that gives us a total cost of 160m for this picture. I would bet that with dvd sales and rentals could brake even though.

I dunno, this really wasn't a dream project of Marty's (at least I don't think it was), so it seems to me it was more of a commissioned thing to do after Gangs. With that in mind, I don't think he would've been given the money if the backers didn't think it was gonna do well.

At least that would make sense to me. I think it'll sell great. Gangs seemed to do good on video/dvd, and with the cast being fairly recognizable, they should be able to push this thing.

Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary: the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

I.E.G., Warner Bros., and Miramax had recently bought a great new full page ad that was placed in the Daily Variety congratulating filmmaker, Martin Scorsese on the completion of principle photography for the highly anticipated Howard Hughes biopic entitled, The Aviator.

“Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.” - Andy Warhol

Hope for what? I'm confused as to why they would do this. Other than the obvious reasons: publicity and pumping Scorsese up and inflating his ego. Not saying that's a bad thing or anything. I'd love it if I completed a film and someone bought an ad in an industry magazine congratulating me. I'm just curious as to what the point is, especially since I've never seen anything like it before.

I'm confused as to why they would do this. Other than the obvious reasons: publicity and pumping Scorsese up and inflating his ego. Not saying that's a bad thing or anything. I'd love it if I completed a film and someone bought an ad in an industry magazine congratulating me. I'm just curious as to what the point is, especially since I've never seen anything like it before.

I've frequently seen similar trade ads for such high-profile, big-budget films. But more to the point, in the current Forbes magazine, producer Graham King laments the difficulty he had in securing a completion bond for the film because of Scorsese's GONY experience.

that article makes Marty out to be a pariah, rather than what he is: the greatest living American director.

sad day when I realize the suits don't trust him.

I hope he doesn't get the Oscar for this one though. I want him to stay in the "ripped off" club. It's got better membership.

Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary: the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

the movie being really good. not terribly excited about the premise, but i like scorsese a lot (although for me he's hit and miss). i could care less about him winning the oscar, i just think the poster looks pretty fucking cool.

Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.